Emory vs Duke vs Vanderbilt

bernie12
Thu, 04 Jul 2013 14:26:13 +0000

Ok, I’ll finish this with a shorter than normal post. You are a ■■■■■ because your arguments of your points are stupid and lack perspective. They just throw numbers together with no context in an attempt to denigrate the school. You don’t attempt to find examples where other elite schools struggle or fell in ranking. You single Emory out as unique and then compare it to Rome because it was likely faultily ranked at 9 at one point in time (like Cornell being well in the top 10 at one point but now being 14/15-25 pretty consistently now). Your argument can be summed up as “some rankings sometimes go down at Emory, and that’s baaaaad! It’s going to slip out of the top 30!” LOL. It’s also ignored or not addressed when some depts went up or stayed strong in rankings (like some of the depts in Laney, Public Health, or nursing, and you even ignored law and decided to cite its ranking 2 years ago). ■■■■■. You merely want to belittle the school with your weak arguments.

I have disproven the premise of 1, 2 is stupid. A school could technically improve and its rank not move (Vandy for the past 3 years…). The main thing not improving is ECAS admissions (I’m sure this is why we went down. Again, the SATs were always lower than those other places, in addition, USNWR weighted HS counselor scores more, and a lot of these folks aren’t going to rank based upon quality moreso than lay prestige. Emory was just corrected to its rightful spot if you buy the validity of the metrics being used now. This has been even more so proven by the “actual” numbers which are closer or even identical to Berkeley’s), not the institution as a whole. Public Health got new facilities got the highest amount of apps. for some programs (Actually I think it was the masters in public health, the largest one. Plus, the public health school is just…well…amazing. And it started in 1990?). The med. school has a new curriculum (which is on par or better than many peers in terms of innovation, so clearly that entity is keeping up), B-school is still doing well, and its MBA program is getting really good press lately because of its placement data (MBA apparently also implemented a new curriculum). BBA still strong. Emory Healthcare still going strong (It’ll be interesting to see what the proton therapy center brings about. This is an example of a worthwhile facility as it is innovative). You are equating increased ranking to “actual” improvement. There isn’t much of a correlation. Once in the upper echelon (the top 30 and especially top 25 or so), it is a numbers game that can easily be manipulated. Just get the app. numbers up with marketing ploys and then boost your SATs and your rank becomes more fluid like Chicago for example. It already had high SATs, just needed to reject a higher percentage of applicants. This is not meaningful “improvement”. It is superficial. You are a ■■■■■ and since you are ranking obsessed, you seem to value this superficial improvement over actual improvement. I want to see actual improvement and innovation in UG, G, and professional education. I care more to see changes in the curriculum/research robustness/focus, if the changes work, do placement numbers improve, does student satisfaction increase, employer satisfaction w/alumni, etc. You know things that actually matter and lead to payoffs in the longterm reputation and well-being of the place, not short-term ploys to increase the ranking.